Corrected some bridleways 7 cycleways in Chichester
I was wondering why you changed these routes to paths. They are signposted as combined cycle routes / footpaths. The original tag was correct.
Presuming you are referring to the changes on Centurion Way. highway=cycleway is for ways that are designed & designated only for bicycles (however can have foot access to), however Centurion Way is designed as a shared path, with both foot & cycle traffic, as such it is tagged as a path with foot & bicycle with designated access as per guidelines set out in the wiki.
I am referring to all the alterations to cycle routes around Chichester.
It is an unnecessary and counter productive change. The original tag ( which is allowed ) meant cycle routes would be rendered on Osmand. Now cyclists just see what looks like a footpath rendered on the map.
Could you give an example of where, looking at all the ones changed only seem to be shared spaces, not cycle tracks/cycleways
As far as I can see, the changeset improved the tagging. If the paths were designed for bicycles with access for foot traffic, the previous tagging would be correct, but that isn't the case at any of the changes on this change set.
OSM is to reflect what is actually on the ground, and shouldn't be altered to suit a render (such as OSMand).
I've just downloaded OSMand, and it is showing highway=path and bicycle=designated in blue (when in the cycle mode) just the same as highway=cycleway. Likewise every other service I've used shows them the same. Maybe you are running an old version of the software, or not on the cycle mode.
No.I am using Osmand Live with the latest map updates and cycling profile set. How an element is rendered is fundamental to how it is interpreted hence my comments. A significant and meaningful characteristic of the ways is that cyclists are permitted. OSM works by identifying the significant. Your changeset has ignored that principle and tagged the generic. As a result the map is diminished.
Well OSMand is rending highway=path & bicycle=designated the exact same as highway=cycleway.
The path is a shared surface, used by more foot traffic than bicycles, as well as being designed for both. So highway=cycleway wouldn't be suitable since how its currently tagged reflects is use better.
The bicycle relation exists (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/21018) & it is tagged as designated for cycles, so OSM and any render, router or other system can easily identify it as suitable and preferable for bicycles to use.
If you wish to ask someone at the Data Working Group or another admin role to resolve this then go for it.
Your first point is incorrect. Osmand update their maps once a month. The current map rending is from my tags not yours.
Your second point is inaccurate. As a resident and cyclist in Chichester I am fully aware how cycle routes are utilised.
Your third point is also incorrect. If you were to subscribe to Osmand Live and obtain up to date maps you would see that the ways that you have altered are rendered as footpaths.
Your actions have caused unnecessary conflict. You have made alterations without having the decency to discuss the matter with the original mapper first. You are now expecting others at OSM to expend resources on a matter that did not require resolving in the first place. I think you should bow out and reflect.
Take a look.
I am now even more certain that highway=cycleway is just plain wrong for this path.
If you can come up with any VALID points for it to be incorrectly tagged as a cycleway, I'd like to hear them, otherwise I am not interested in your victim playing games.
I'm not going to contact the original mapper unless it was recently edited, or had a note on it explaining why it was tagged in such a way.
You are using the base layer in Osmand. You have not configured any profiles in the app. There are many settings, map styles and map types. They in turn can be configured in numerous ways.
My maps have again had a full update today. All your amendments on my cycling profile still show as footpaths. I have used Osmand for cycle touring for many years so I do know my why around the app.
Using one 14 minute video to somehow validate the use of a “path” is not credible. I have lived in Chichester since 1994. I know how all cycle paths in the area are utilised.
LCN 88 is connected to and forms part of National Cycle Route 2 which passes through Chichester. Details can be found here.
As custodians of the cycle network Sustrans state on the above website that
“The Centurion Way is part of the National Cycle Network, cared for by Sustrans”.
Their logo also appears on the routes information boards,
I repeat OSM works on the principle of identifying the significant. I think you should show good grace and withdraw.
I've put this to the mailing list to see what the general consensus is.
Thomas, I'm afraid you're not correct that when you say "highway=cycleway is for ways that are designed & designated only for bicycles".
That has never been the case in UK mapping practice. It wouldn't make sense if it was - there are very, very few paths in the UK that are bicycle-only.
highway=cycleway can be a more useful tag than highway=path as it suggests that the path has been constructed to standards suitable for cycle traffic. To take an extreme example, a mountain path in Scotland could be tagged highway=path, foot=designated, bicycle=designated, surface=gravel. All of those might be true yet it still wouldn't be practically navigable by bike (unless you're Danny Macaskill). highway=cycleway provides that reassurance.
Could you please indicate which mailing list you are referring to.
If the tagging guidelines of cycleways/paths in the UK is different to the rest of the world, should there be a dedicated wiki page for "cycle tagging in the UK" or something?
I am under the impression that highway=cycleway is for ways that are fully designed around bicycles, such as the examples in the video below.
While there isn't a great deal of these in the UK, how would it be possible to differentiate between these and shared use paths if they are both tagged the same?
Gavin, The talk-gb mailing list.
I'm not saying it's different; I'm just talking about UK mapping practice here because this changeset is in the UK. FWIW, there are plenty of shared-use ways in (off the top of my head) France and the US which are tagged with highway=cycleway.
There really are precious few cycle-only paths in the UK - I don't recall ever encountering one and I run a cycling website! - but if you do encounter one, you simply tag it with highway=cycleway, foot=no.
So on the wiki there is this section
I presume this is correct somewhere in the world, but not here. Plus the article shows the typical Road sign for shared/segregated foot/cycle ways (although we omit the horizontal line). On the cycleway page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=cycleway it shows the sign, however this sign is for an actual cycleway/track (although foot traffic isn't prohibited, it is not designed for it).
These really ought to be clarified since they hold conflicting information.
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use under an open license.
Hosting is supported by UCL, Bytemark Hosting, and other partners.